2005 Outback Snow Chains

Just playing the devil's advocate here, but why would you want to drive in conditions where chains are mandatory? Wouldn't a good set of Alpins do?

Ron

Correct, most times I won't need chains or won't want to drive if chains are mandatory on AWDs. I know all that. Still, snowstorm may suddenly happen in the middle of freeway, things happen. By California/Nevada law I have to carry chains with me even in AWD, this clearly presumes I can and will put them on if it becomes mandatory. But not in 2005 Outback. If I knew that I wouldn't buy it. I may be paranoid but I think OB buyers should know this tiny detail before they buy OB. I don't ask Porsche to disclose if chains can be put on it, but OB buyers should be aware of it.

You're absolutely correct. Previous year OBs have had this problem too, and it's often been solved by some chain finally getting approved.

Dunno about Nevada, but chain controls in California are far too strict, and it's absurd if you buy a AWD vehicle and find can't drive it due to a little snow. I don't know the threshold where they require chains on AWD, but they sometimes require them on other cars with only a light dusting of snow on the ground. It's a way to slow traffic down. A lot.

You may be able to use any low-profile S-class chain of the right size. Or not. A web search may find an answer. Also, you may be able to use a Spikes Spider (or similar device). These are much easier to install than chains, but expensive, and it's a shame to have to buy 4 when you may never need them.

Up here in the Sierras (mostly California side), they will put up chains mandatory controls and if you have to drive those roads you're stuck with it. I have never chained my trusty '88 up, and rarely even put the studded snows on, but I carry a set of chains because the possibility occurs that I'll run into a chain control area.

Eric

Hi,

This brings back memories of when I would drive up to Mammoth Lakes from san Diego to go skiing, back in the mid 1970's. I was driving a Chevy Vega GT wagon with 70 series tires which barely cleared the wheel wells. There was no hope of ever getting chains on that car. Because of the chain controls, I carried a set of dummy chains in the car, just for the benefit of the CHP. It was really absurd to see people stopped by the side of Highway 395, putting their chains on, 30 miles before reaching the turnoff to Mammoth Lakes. The CHP would flag people down as soon as they turned off Highway

395. Usually, there was a long line of cars pulled over with drivers installing chains. I would make a show of putting on my chains. As soon as the trooper was distracted by new arrivals, I would take off up the hill to the village. I never got stuck, as I grew up in snow country. One of these days, I'm going to try it in my Outback!

Dave

Don't know what state you live in, but check your state regulations. In Oregon AWD with snow tires are considered traction devices, just like chains. And face it, if you can't get through with AWD with snow tires do you really want to be out? I don't.

It really takes a long time for reply to be actually posted.

Anyway, the laws may be right or wrong, but I have to obide anyway. So I'm just making sure I *can* obide them when I must. This is really a legal issue which I think people must be aware of and I would imagine an honest car salesman :) should disclose.

In California and Nevada is same since in Tahoe it's all the same, not too often when they actually MANDATE AWD to wear chains. But it actually happens. More often though, they request you to CARRY chains with you. That implies, as you can imagine, that you *CAN* put them on, if worse comes to worst. Now, follow me, if I'm driving stock Outback 2005, police may KNOW that the manufacturer does NOT allows chains on that vehicle. They may tell me that I can't go, can they? I don't see why not.

Hence, legaly, I don't know if I can get away and I may be pulled over by police and they won't let me go? I don't know if that'll ever happen, however when I spend over 30K on a mighty Subaru, I really don't want to face such challenges. The fact is that I may get halted by police and will be freezing on the freeway looking at Toyota Corollas in chains to pass by me.

If you get close to Outback 2005 XT Limited, stock tires, turn the steering wheel until the wheels turn quite a bit, you'll see you can't stick a finger between the tire and car body. I mean literally, I already showed to friends, they were stunned. Subaru was NOT joking you can't put anything in there. Not even smallest Sure Grip Z cables, which is smaller than S class. But I didn't check Spikes Spider, I guess I'll have to.

And if I knew this all last Friday, I would not buy an Outback and then look at VW and Audi. This is my third Subaru and may be the last one, although who knows, may be I'll get over it. But unless somebody explains to me what are they thinking, I lost all respect for them. I'm not a luxury-brand addict, I liked Subaru for what it does, but if they piss me off, then good luck to them luring in Audi, BMW and Lexus fans.

That was one of the reasons I didn't buy an OBW. Between the continuing chain clearance issues, and the Sunroof design (1st they had none, finally they offer one over the driver that doesn't slide), I thought of the OBs as a bit of a kludge, and thought the Forester better conceived.

I learned that Foresters are pretty tight when it comes to chain clearance too, but in the back. BTW, if the clearance problem is in the front, at or near full steering lock, I'd expect that might be OK on the highway (less good around town).

No snow tires. I live in sunny San Francisco Bay Area. I take off from there and go to Tahoe. The road, at times, is quite rough last 50 miles if it snows. I don't see an option of changing the tires every time I go and then drive about 200 miles in sunny weather in snow tires. If you all trying to convince me I won't likely need chains, I agree. But I do want a peace of mind that I have chains in the trunk if that improbable 1% actually happens. I have a friend with BMW X5 who had to put chains on once, precisely last December, during big storm in Tahoe. He had to go and buy on the spot because he never imagined he'll need them. He drove up the hill but literally could not get down because it was a hill of ice. Things happen. All I want is to put chains into trunk and never think about them but know I have them, ple-e-ase, can I do it? I can't do it in the Outback which I paid over 30K for. It is really frustrating, whether I'll ever need chains or not. I appreciate all stories how one can dodge the police and go without chains, it's your choice and I don't argue. But, while I hope to not need them, I want to be ready to put chains on.

I checked previous Outback looks like can fit S-class easily, may be wont fit big chains. 2005 Outback is so tight you won't believe it, yes in the front when wheels are close to full turn you can't squeeze a pencil there. If I don't ever rotate wheels I may possibly use Sure Grip Z but then only stay in straight line :). Rear wheels a bit better and they don't turn, not sure still if Sure Grip will fit there, will be danger of body damage, not sure. Subaru says chains only on front wheels, don't know how hard of a requirement it is (mine is manual tranny).

I had a Forester, then WRX. New OB is an interesting car so I wanted to try it. It's big to fit 3 not large people in the back including one of them being a car seat for my 4 month old, that's pretty good. Don't think can do it in Forester. It's amazingly fast for such car (with manual), etc. I only need to be able to put the chains on to feel all satisfied and ready for adventure :)

Buy a set of steel rims of a smaller size for winter. Put tires on it with more clearance. Buy chains for those tires.

Yeah, your speedometer will read off a bit, but you'll have tires with chains.

Have you checked into cables, vs. chains?

Not always an option: you need to be sure the rims clear the brake rotors. Even smaller tires on stock size rims might not be optimal here where we drive

2hrs to reach the snow conditions.

Hopefully the Spikes Spider will work for him. That provides a convenient, if expensive solution.

I have no experience with chains (haven't seen anyone use them in my state in decades, and they may be illegal here by now), but the above seems like an obvious and practical solution. Bravo!

BTW, in bad weather, narrower tires will cut into the messy stuff better than wider tires will. The wider tires spread the weight around and are more likely to slip and slide.

Does the manual suggest any alternatives?

Have you asked Subaru USA for suggestions?

Given how attractive and popular Subarus are in snowy regions of the US, I wonder if somebody at Subaru USA has thought about this issue and has some advice.

Greetings. I live in Truckee, CA in the Sierras and work in Reno, about a 70-mile round-trip commute. I go from about 6000 ft elevation to about

4400 ft every day. My experience is that 4WD=chains as far as the troopers are concerned on both the CA and NV sides of the border.

When I-80 is under a mandatory chains requirement, any 4WD car is allowed through without chains. The signs say chains mandatory, but 4WD is sufficient. I don't own chains and never had a problem with the troopers or the snow. Well, at least no problems with the troopers letting me through without chains. YMMV.

Good to know. The signs vary. One one trip, I remember several on 5 north that said chains or snow tires required (for the typical very light snow). I was driving a

2WD pickup (one of the poorer vehicles for real snow). While *everybody* was out kneeling in the slush to install chains, I went up the the chain control to see if my M+S all-season tires would get me through. Sure did. Maybe 90% of the passenger cars had all-season tires too, but didn't think to see if that was good enough.

I realize all-season tires aren't as good in snow as snow-tires, but sometimes they're good enough for the CHP. Oh, and one that trip, when we reached Oregon I encountered a "chains recommended" sign, and that was the first time you might have conceiveably wanted chains. They would have been absurd for the conditions in CA, where everyone was installing them (then removing, then installing again).

Did the sign say 4WD + snow tires or chains? Or just 4WD with chains? If the former, they might have considered your tires good enough. If the latter, I'll keep in mind that the chains might really be optional.

Thanks for the tip. David

they're good

The signs never say anything about 4WD. They only say chains mandatory.

All Subarus are waived through, as they're assumed to have 4WD. I was stopped with my other vehicle and asked if it was 4WD. It was, and I was waived through. I don't have chains for either vehicle. Take a look at the official state page on the subject:

. I don't think that I've ever noticed whether the signs say R1 or R2. So, the basic problem is the same. The OBW won't support chains, but I don't think you'll have problems.

I actually did ask Subaru and they replied right away, which was nice. They said they do not officially approve any chains or cables for Outbacks, but said they can recommend SureGrip cables as they know OB owners use them. So it was an unofficial endorsement. I know SureGrip will work on any OB

2004 and before but I don't think they will fit on 2005 OB. I'll have to actually try but I'm pretty sure as is. I also asked if I can put cables on rear tires, SOA just referred me to the manual which says no.

No I don't think SOA thinks about chains at all, but it's only my opinion. If you get a chance to see the new 2005 OB (2.5XT, but probably doesn't matter), rotate front wheels a bit and check the clearance. That'll show Subaru tries to make sure NO chains or cables will fit there. It's like day and night from 2004 OB.

For all other opinions, thanks, I appreciate it. Yes this is my 3rd Subaru and I never had to put chains on one yet, although I always had them just in case. There is still a difference between having but not needing chains and not being able to use them at all.